Kitsap County Opts for Opioid, Disaster Funds Accuracy After Audit Findings
Kitsap County experienced discrepancies in how it tracked federal spending, resulting in an overstatement of $2.2 million in opioid grant outlays and a timing misplacement of nearly $3.7 million in pandemic-era disaster aid, according to a state audit.
The review, conducted by the Washington State Auditor’s Office, focused on the county’s fiscal year 2025 financial activities. Auditors observed that the county’s internal processes for compiling and vetting its federal spending schedule did not consistently flag the missteps before reporting.
County officials later adjusted the figures, and auditors issued clean opinions on both the financial statements and compliance with major federal programs. No federal awards were flagged for repayment, and no costs were deemed unallowable.
A key component of the audit was the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards, a supplementary document that details spending tied to federal grants. Auditors identified that $2.2 million in activity—mostly local in origin—was incorrectly categorized under the federal Opioid STR grant program.
In another instance, $3,664,923 in expenses tied to the federal COVID-19 Disaster Grants–Public Assistance program were filed under the 2025 schedule instead of the appropriate 2024 filing. Auditors confirmed this delay did not alter the scope of required audits for either year, though it introduced a higher risk of missing reporting deadlines or misclassifications in future cycles.
Beyond those two main items, auditors noted a number of smaller inconsistencies in the schedule and supporting documentation. Staff overseeing grant programs were found to lack consistent awareness of specialized reporting rules, and county systems did not consistently ensure preparers had access to those expectations.
Based on these observations, auditors labeled the issue a “significant deficiency”—a step below a material weakness but still warranting oversight attention from leadership and finance teams.
The state auditor’s office recommended improvements in preparation and review workflows, increased staffing support, and expanded training opportunities focused on grant-specific reporting standards.
County leadership acknowledged the findings and outlined corrective steps, including a newly implemented final review checklist for the federal spending schedule. Plans also include conducting interim reviews of grant activity across departments before annual reporting, as well as targeted training for staff handling grant administration and reporting.
Officials noted that the county’s auditor’s office already examines grant agreements to determine reporting obligations and intends to bolster that work with refresher courses for contract reviewers and updated tools such as checklists and reference guides.
State auditors indicated they will monitor implementation progress during the county’s next scheduled audit.
The publication advises that the narrative should stand on its own merits rather than serving as a vehicle for commercial promotion. Readers are encouraged to reach out for inquiries or additional information.